National Republican., 1887-02-14
The Anti.Polygamy Bill.

EDITOR NATIONAL REPUBLICAN: In the Post
of this morning the following appears under
the head OF congressional matters:
.'It is learned that the section of the anti
cludes from the registration lists the names of
all persons who refuse to take an oath to obey
the Edmunds act has been made much more
Gep, ey thG Snesas rom I'm s
those who refuse to support the law of 1852,
uhe Edmunds acD or this amendatory act or
who practice and abet or avow a belief in
royGamy. The conferrees, in adding these
restrictions TO the original bill, were animated
by desire TO prevent the encouragement aud
sustenance of polygamy by persons who keep
the practice of polygamy, while openly avow-
ing their beliefin the doctrine"
If this Is n correct statement of the shape In
which the bill Is TO come before the House for
final action 1t has come to this-lhnt men are
10 be DISTINGUISHED for holding religious be-
lief, although they may break no law. 1t Is
wen known that among the younger Mormons
there are many men who have never married
more than one wife, and who, while they
sincerely believe In the revelation which
puIpoTts TO have come through Joseph Smith,
and have believed II since they were born
regard It's tsteachings concerning pluTai mlrrilge
as permitting thar practice by divine authority
but not as making 1t obligatory. As the
older Mormons who have more than one wife
and who believe that plural marriage Is bind
ing upon the individual conscience when cir
cumstapces allow of II, die of the younger men,
who do not hold this particular article OF the
faith, and who are monOgnmists, must become
the majority of the denomination, Tnese
men, II teems, are TO he disranchlsed II they
do not take an oath TO Tenounce their belief
that their fathers and mothers obeyed what
was to them n divine INJUNCTION when they
entered into the relation Ul one husband and
several wives, To say anything in opposition
to snch legislation rs this. In ths present
temper Of the public mind on this subject,
would be tfuitleSs of course. Men seem de-
teImined TO rush on in toe suppression OF
rOlygHmy regardless of the means employed
ior The pufpo,e; and we are to have the
planett principles Of religious and civil
liberty trnmpled under foot, when there is u
plain and easy way out OF the whole difficulty
without violating cithrT tho Letter Or the spirit
Of the constitution Rat things haze com, tl
this pass because there Hre persons who are
determined that the breach between the Mlr-
mons and the country shall be made impas3l.
bic, so that there can BE- no settlement of the
deploTable difficulty without turning so1lrty
in lutah upside down, aui subeCtug the
majority ofthe population 20 the dominion OF
the minority. II las already come to be n true
sayiug in one OF the territories, Dakota, where
there IL a dlsffanchising law made by n GENTLE
legislature that there are justtwO rights left for
the NoTmons,R a right TO pay taxes aud right TO
die. We are now, II seems, 20 make this true
in Utah by congressional legislation, in com
munity where iour'iillhs Of the population are
MOrmons. II remains 10 be seen whether
this can be done In n House of Representatives
whore the Democratic party Is responsible for
the legislation that passes that body | 10 not
doubt that there are many members OF both
parties who know that this bill Is both uncOu-
stitutienal and unwise, but who will perhaps.
under the previous question, ALLOW IL TO pass
without opposition. In what position they will
place the executive, II Is for them 10 consider.
Your obedient servant
WAsHINoToN, Feb, 10.